On 8 January 2015 at 15:54, Dennis Gilmore <dennis@ausil.us> wrote:
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 17:09:02 +0200
Yanko Kaneti <yaneti@declera.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2014-12-30 at 14:53 +0100, Marianne Lombard wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > A bug is open for perl-XML-TreePP since July (for opening a epel 7
> > branch) with no reaction
> > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123681)
> > I need this package so I'm volunteer to maintain it
> This bug seems unnecessary. AFAIK all it takes to create a branch for
> a package is a willing maintainer who's already a packager, in this
> case you,  to make a SCM request for it in the package review request

Policy does require you to contact the maintainer
It is quite inappropriate to not have the courtesy to contact the
fedora maintainer first.

Or the policy can be revisited if potential maintainers are having problems getting replies from current maintainers.

> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607878
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests#Package_Change_Requests_for_existing_packages
> Make sure to list yourself as a "owner" of the new branch.
Only do that after contacting the Fedora maintainer

> Its perfectly understandable for a primary POC of a package on the
> Fedora branches to not want to deal with the EPEL packaging.

It is quite understandable and acceptable, but you do need to contact
them to check first and not just go and branch a package. branching is
not without cost, as things are setup Fedora maintainers will still get
bug reports and email. there may also be a very valid reason for not
branching a package.

I thought the problem was that the maintainer was not responding (eg what the subject line says.) Since the person is not responding..  what is needed next.

Stephen J Smoogen.